Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 46 references

On the intracyclic instability in Stokes layers

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that the intracyclic turbulence bursts observed in transitional Stokes layers are driven by linear, non-normal transient energy growth, quantified by the Finite-Time Lyapunov Exponent (FTLE), and that this linear…

desk verdict Solid linear transient-growth analysis of finite Stokes layers, but the headline experimental match is asserted from a visual comparison and needs either a real correlation metric or a more modest conclusion. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21913 v2 pith:IGRS2OEM submitted 2025-05-28 physics.flu-dyn

Mengqi Zhang This is my paper
classification physics.flu-dyn PACS 47.20.Ft47.27.Cn
keywords StokeslayerFinite-TimeLyapunovExponenttransientgrowthnon-normalinstabilityintracyclicoscillatoryboundarysubcriticaltransition
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Stokes layers—thin oscillating flows near a wall—transition to turbulence at Reynolds numbers far below what classical stability theory predicts, and the turbulence arrives in bursts toward the end of each deceleration. This paper argues that those bursts are a linear phenomenon: an initially tiny disturbance can be amplified enormously within a single oscillation cycle through non-normal transient growth, even though every Floquet mode is stable. The author computes the Finite-Time Lyapunov Exponent (FTLE), which measures the largest possible energy growth over finite time intervals, and finds that the strongest amplification always occurs in the decelerating phase. That phase pattern matches the experimentally measured axial turbulence intensity from pipe and duct experiments, and it is reproduced in direct numerical simulations seeded with the optimal linear perturbation. If correct, the result reframes the Stokes-layer transition problem: the relevant instability is intracyclic and transient, not a long-time modal instability.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Finite-Time Lyapunov Exponent, defined as the maximum logarithmic growth of disturbance energy over a finite time interval $[t_0,t]$, normalized by $2(t-t_0)$; for the linearized Stokes layer it is computed as the largest singular value of the deformation gradient formed by a time-ordered product of exponential propagators $e^{L(t_j)\delta t}$. The paper computes this via the direct-adjoint looping optimization of the transient-growth functional $G(t_0,t)$. The FTLE function's distribution in the $(t_0,\Delta t)$ plane is what carries the argument: it maps where and when the flow can amplify disturbances, bridging short-time transient growth and the long-time Floquet exponent.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be to compute the time-lagged cross-correlation between the FTLE amplification ridge and phase-resolved axial turbulence intensity from experiments with matched $Re$ and $h$; if the peak correlation is near zero or occurs at a phase where the linear mechanism predicts none, the causal claim fails. A complementary experiment would suppress disturbances at the optimal wavenumber $\alpha\approx0.42$ and check whether the decelerating-phase bursts disappear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that linear transient growth—quantified by the first FTLE over the interval $[t_0,t]$—is the operative mechanism behind the intracyclic instability in transitional Stokes layers. For $Re=540$, $\alpha=0.4$, $h=10$ the FTLE distribution shows pronounced amplification during the decelerating phases, with peak growth around $\Delta t\in[3,4]$, and these high-FTLE regions align with the sharp peaks in axial turbulence intensity measured in prior pipe and duct experiments. The author concludes that Floquet stability (which finds the layer linearly stable at these parameters) and instantaneous/momentary stability (which predicts decay at the start of deceleration) both miss the observed dynamics, whereas the non-normal mechanism captures them. Two parameter trends are established: confining the layer (smaller $h$) weakens amplification, and increasing oscillation frequency has a non-monotonic effect on maximum transient growth. Nonlinear simulations with the optimal linear initial condition confirm the phase-locked bursts, and the paper proposes future experiments to test the mechanism.

Load-bearing premise

The argument stands on the assumption that the phase alignment between the linear FTLE amplification map and the experimentally measured turbulence-intensity peaks is causal—that the optimal linear perturbation resembles the disturbances actually present, and that linear amplification, rather than a nonlinear subcritical mechanism, drives the observed bursts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Because the linear operator can amplify a disturbance by a factor of roughly $10^{17}$ at $Re=540$ within one cycle, subcritical transition in Stokes layers does not require a Floquet-unstable mode; the experimentally observed transition range becomes consistent with linear dynamics.
  • Instantaneous/momentary stability theory's prediction of decay at the onset of deceleration is the wrong diagnostic: the FTLE shows strong amplification through the decelerating phase, so experiments should look for a growth history rather than a frozen-time instability.
  • As the channel half-height $h$ shrinks, transient growth weakens substantially, so more confined oscillatory flows should resist transition; the paper predicts smaller temporal variability in normalized turbulence intensity for small-$h$ layers.
  • Varying the oscillation frequency at fixed kinematics changes $Re$ and $h$ together, and the maximum transient growth responds non-monotonically: destabilization occurs over a low-frequency range, followed by suppression at higher frequencies.
  • Nonlinear simulations started with the optimal linear perturbation exhibit the same intracyclic energy peaks and troughs as the FTLE, indicating that the linear amplification mechanism seeds the nonlinear turbulence cycle.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A quantitative test would be to compute the time-lagged cross-correlation between the FTLE ridge location and experimental axial turbulence intensity at matched $Re$ and $h$; a near-zero correlation would undermine the causal reading even though the FTLE maps are correct.
  • If the linear mechanism is the true trigger, targeted forcing or control at the optimal wavenumber $\alpha\approx0.42$ and optimal phase should suppress or advance the bursts; such an experiment would separate linear seeding from nonlinear subcritical mechanisms.
  • The same FTLE machinery should apply to other time-periodic shear flows, such as pulsatile pipe and channel flow, where the intracyclic burst phase might also be predicted by finite-time linear amplification rather than by quasi-steady stability.
  • The author's small-$h$ prediction (weaker amplification, more stable flow) could be tested in microfluidic or biofluidic oscillatory systems, where $h$ is naturally small; if transition still occurs there, a nonlinear mechanism would be implicated.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the linear stability of a finite Stokes layer (oscillating wall-bounded flow) using Finite-Time Lyapunov Exponent (FTLE) analysis and transient growth optimization. The central claim is that a linear non-normal energy amplification mechanism, quantified by the FTLE, explains the experimentally observed intracyclic instability (turbulence bursts during the decelerating phase). The manuscript validates its linear solvers against Biau (2016), Blennerhassett & Bassom (2006), and Luo & Wu (2010), then computes FTLE maps in the (t0, Δt) plane for Re=540, h=5 and h=10. A qualitative comparison with digitized experimental turbulence-intensity curves from Akhavan et al. (1991a) and Hino et al. (1983) is presented, along with nonlinear DNS that seeds the optimal linear perturbation. The paper concludes that the FTLE agreement with experiments underscores the significance of non-normality in the transition of Stokes layers.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper resolves a long-standing discrepancy between Floquet/instantaneous stability predictions and experiments, establishing transient growth as the operative mechanism for intracyclic instability in transitional Stokes layers. The linear computations are carefully validated against several published benchmarks, and the DNS code is validated against turbulent channel and Couette flows, giving confidence in the numerical machinery. The parametric study of h and frequency effects, including the prediction for small-h confinement, is useful and falsifiable. However, the significance is tempered by the qualitative nature of the experimental comparison and the non-independent nonlinear confirmation; the mechanistic conclusion currently rests on visual alignment rather than a quantitative test.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2, Fig. 3] The claimed agreement between the FTLE distribution and the experimental axial turbulence intensity is qualitative only. No projection of the two-parameter field Λ(t0, Δt) onto the oscillation phase is defined (e.g., I(φ)=max_Δt Λ(φ−Δt, Δt) or a similar quantity), and no correlation metric or uncertainty analysis is provided. The statement that the 'eggplant' regions 'precisely align' with experimental peaks is therefore a visual judgment. Since the conclusion in Section 4 rests on this agreement, a quantitative comparison (e.g., a defined phase-resolved curve from the FTLE field and a concordance statistic) is needed.
  2. [Section 3.2, Fig. 3 (parameter mismatch)] The compared cases are not the same flow: the computation uses h=10, Re=540 in a plane channel, while the experiments are a pipe with h=10.6, Re=540 and a duct with h=12.8, Re=438. The paper says h=10 is 'consistent' with the experiments, but the geometry and parameter values differ. Because Section 3.3 shows that transient growth depends strongly on h and Re (e.g., a drastic decrease for small h), the observed alignment could be accidental. The authors should show that the FTLE/transient-growth pattern is robust across the experimental parameter range (h∈[10,13], Re∈[438,540]) or provide a quantitative sensitivity estimate.
  3. [Section 3.4, Fig. 7] The nonlinear simulation is seeded with the optimal initial perturbation (kinetic energy 10^-10) targeting the maximum transient growth at t=1, so the resulting intracyclic phase in Fig. 3(c) is inherited from the linear optimal input rather than emerging spontaneously from ambient noise. Consequently, the statement in Section 4 that the 'nonlinear simulations also confirm the intracyclic instability' is stronger than the evidence supports. The DNS demonstrates that the linear optimal mode can generate the observed phase pattern, but it is not an independent test of the mechanism; a simulation with random or broadband initial conditions (or sustained forcing) would be needed to claim confirmation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (2.6)] The definition of the FTLE is written with a typo ('u, u, u') and the norms are not explicitly defined in the equation; please clarify the notation (e.g., ||u||_2 as the kinetic-energy norm).
  2. [Section 3.2, figure caption] The term 'eggplant' is informal and may confuse readers; consider replacing with a descriptive phrase such as 'the high-Λ region spanning Δt∈[1,2π]'.
  3. [Section 3.3, Fig. 6] The comparison with Merkli & Thomann (1975) correctly notes a discrepancy, but the sentence about their 'figure 5' is vague; specify which quantity is plotted and how it relates to the present Re/h definitions.
  4. [Section 4, conclusion] The phrase 'main contribution of this investigation' is somewhat overstated given the qualitative comparison in Section 3.2; a more cautious phrasing would better match the evidence presented.
  5. [Section 2.1, Eq. (2.3)] The notation 'cosh(√(2i)y)/2cosh(√(2i)h)' is ambiguous regarding the factor 2 in the denominator; adding parentheses (e.g., cosh(√(2i)y)/(2cosh(√(2i)h))) would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the FTLE/transient-growth analysis is computed from the linearized Navier–Stokes equations without fitting parameters to experimental data, and the paper validates its numerical methods against independent benchmarks.

full rationale

The central FTLE and transient-growth calculations are self-contained: they solve the linearized initial-value problem for the analytic Stokes-layer base flow, with no experimental constants fitted into the model. The experimental comparison in Section 3.2 is post hoc and qualitative, but it does not feed back into the calculation, so it cannot make the derivation circular. The choice of alpha = 0.4 is guided by the paper's own transient-growth optimization, but this is an internal parameter selection typical of linear stability studies, and the FTLE distribution is shown to be robust over alpha = 0.40 to 0.48. The nonlinear DNS in Section 3.4 is initialized with the optimal linear perturbation; the paper explicitly acknowledges that the early energy evolution follows the optimal-growth envelope because of this initial condition, so there is no undisclosed substitution of the prediction for the input. The agreement between the DNS phase pattern and the FTLE is a sufficiency demonstration, not an independent confirmation, but that is a scientific limitation rather than a circular reduction. Numerical methods are validated against Biau (2016), Blennerhassett and Bassom (2006), Luo and Wu (2010), Blondeaux and Vittori (2021), and DNS benchmarks for turbulent channel and Couette flow. No equation is defined in terms of the quantity it is said to predict, and no load-bearing conclusion relies on a self-citation chain. Therefore no specific circular step can be exhibited from the paper's text.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central computation has no fitted constants. All inputs are either physical parameters taken from the experimental or hypothetical setup (Re, alpha, gamma, h) or numerical discretization choices. The main burden is the interpretive step that connects linear FTLE amplification to measured turbulence intensity, which is an assumption rather than a derived consequence.

free parameters (2)
  • Streamwise wavenumber alpha = 0.4
    Chosen as representative because it is near the wavenumber of maximum transient growth (Fig. 4) and matches the wavelength of the most amplified disturbance in Thomas et al. (2014). It is an input selection, not fitted to experimental data, but the main FTLE-experiment comparison depends on it. The paper shows robustness over alpha from 0.40 to 0.48.
  • Reference parameter set for frequency study (Reref, href, alpharef) = Reref=540, href=3, alpharef=0.4
    Defines the baseline omega_ref used in the frequency-ratio study. The non-monotonic frequency result (Fig. 6) is conditional on this reference point; the authors justify alpharef=0.4 but the choice of Reref=540 and href=3 is a modeling choice.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The linearized Navier-Stokes equations (2.4) are a valid description of small disturbances, so nonlinear terms can be neglected in the FTLE/transient-growth analysis.
    Invoked in Section 2.1 when deriving Eq. (2.4) from Eq. (2.1). The subsequent comparison with saturated turbulence assumes the linear mechanism still shapes the phase of nonlinear energy.
  • domain assumption FTLE/transient growth computed on the linearized operator is a meaningful proxy for the occurrence of turbulence in the experiments.
    Used to interpret Figs. 3(a,b) as evidence that linear amplification causes intracyclic instability; this is the central interpretive assumption and is not independently established.
  • domain assumption Oscillating-wall and oscillating-pressure-gradient configurations are mathematically equivalent for comparison with experiments.
    Explicitly stated in Section 3.2 in response to a reviewer; it holds under a Galilean transformation with an additional body force, but requires that the experimental pressure-driven flow matches the finite-Stokes-layer base flow.
  • standard math The time-ordered product representation of the propagator (Eq. 2.9) converges to the true linear flow map.
    Standard result from Farrell and Ioannou (1996); used for the discrete computation of FTLE.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the intracyclic instability in Stokes layers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IGRS2OEM

@misc{pith2026250521913,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the intracyclic instability in Stokes layers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IGRS2OEM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21913}
}
read the original abstract

Time-dependent fluid dynamics plays a crucial role in both natural phenomena and industrial applications. Understanding the flow instabilities and transitions within these dynamical systems is essential for predicting and controlling their unsteady behaviour. A classic example of time-dependent flow is the Stokes layer. To study the transition mechanism in this flow, we employ the Finite-Time Lyapunov Exponent (FTLE) to demonstrate that a linear energy amplification mechanism may explain the intracyclic instability in the transitional Stokes layer, supported by favourable comparisons with experimental measurements of axial turbulence intensity. This complements existing theories applied to the Stokes layer in the literature, including the Floquet analysis and the instantaneous/momentary analyses, which have struggled to capture this experimental observation accurately. The FTLE analysis is closely related to the transient growth analysis, formulated as an optimisation problem of the disturbance energy growth over time. We found that the energy amplification weakens as the finite Stokes layer becomes more confined and the oscillating frequency has a non-monotonic effect on the maximum transient growth. Based on these results, we recommend future experimental studies to validate this linear mechanism.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21913 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Transient growth in 2-D Stokes layers with parameters identical to those in Biau (2016). The two studies use different non-dimensionalisation methods for the flow system, necessitating conversion of the parameters; see the legend for details. The finite domain in our computation is set to h = 16 to mimic the semi-infinite flow considered in Biau (2016). The lines show our computational results, while the three f… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Stability analyses of a typical 2-D finite Stokes layer with Re = 540, α = 0.4, h = 5. (a) Transient growth calculated using two time-integration methods (see the legend) and the Floquet decay rate at large time. (b) The growth rate λ2 in the instantaneous/momentary stability analyses (left-hand y-axis) and the first FTLE Λ (right-hand y-axis). (c) Distribution of FTLE as a function of the starting time t0 and the i… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Distribution of FTLE as function of the starting time t0 and the integrated period ∆t (= t − t0). The parameters are Re = 540, α = 0.4, γ = 0, h = 10. (b) Normalised axial turbulence intensity (u′2 ) 1/2 digitally extracted from the experimental literature. Lines with symbols from figure 9 of Akhavan et al. (1991a). Akhavan et al. (1991a) concerns the Stokes layer in a pipe with Re = 540, h = 10.6 (or in their n… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Effect of α and Re on the transient growth G(t0 = 0, t) (color contour) in 2D finite Stokes layers with h = 5. Next, we explore the effect of the half-wall distance h on the FTLE in the finite Stokes layers. Large-h flows have been widely studied in the literature, whi…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Effect of nondimensional channel half-height h on the transient growth G(t0 = 0, t). (b) Distribution of the first FTLE Λ in the t0 − ∆t plane for the case h = 2. The other parameters are Re = 540, α = 0.4, γ = 0. while fixing αref = 0.4. We choose to fix α = 0.4 b…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Contour plot of G(t0 = 0, t) on a base-10 logarithmic scale. The left-hand y-axis indicates the ratio ω/ωref, where ωref corresponds to the reference parameter set (Reref = 540, href = 3). The wavenumber is fixed at α = 0.4 in all cases to capture the most amplified tr…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Nonlinear evolution of the perturbation kinetic energy E ′ k(t) = 1 2h R ||u(y, t) − Ub(y, t)||2 dy (cyan line) at Re = 540, h = 10. Note that u(y, t) have been averaged over the xz plane before the integration and Ub(y, t) is homogeneous in the xz plane by definition.…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Profiles of (a) the laminar Stokes layer Ub(y, t), (b) the phase-averaged flow along the x direction over 27 periods ¯u(y, t), and (c) the difference between the two, Ub(y, t) − u¯(y, t), at Re = 540, h = 10. Here, ¯u(y, t) has been spatially averaged in the x − z plan…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Phase-averaged x-component perturbation kinetic energy E ′ x(t) calculated with respect to the laminar flow (red, E ′ x(t) = 1 2h R ||u(y, t) − Ub(y, t)||2 dy) and the time-mean flow (blue, E ′ x(t) = 1 2h R ||u(y, t) − u¯(y, t)||2 dy) at Re = 540, h = 10. Here, ¯u(y, …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Verification of the DNS code. Top row: mean velocity profiles; middle row: profiles of turbulence intensities; bottom row: profiles of shear stresses (solid lines: Reynolds stress (RS+); dashed lines: viscous shear stress (U +′ ); dash-dotted lines: total stress). Lef…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year eprint label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 'mid.sentence ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

  3. [3]

    , Kamm, R

    Akhavan, R. , Kamm, R. D. & Shapiro, A. H. 1991 a\/ An investigation of transition to turbulence in bounded oscillatory Stokes flows Part 1. Experiments . J. Fluid Mech. 225 , 395--422

    work page 1991

  4. [4]

    , Kamm, R

    Akhavan, R. , Kamm, R. D. & Shapiro, A. H. 1991 b\/ An investigation of transition to turbulence in bounded oscillatory Stokes flows Part 2. Numerical simulations . J. Fluid Mech. 225 , 423--444

    work page 1991

  5. [5]

    2016 Transient growth of perturbations in Stokes oscillatory flows

    Biau, D. 2016 Transient growth of perturbations in Stokes oscillatory flows . J. Fluid Mech. 794 , R4

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Blennerhassett, P. J. & Bassom, A. P. 2002 The linear stability of flat Stokes layers . J. Fluid Mech. 464 , 393--410

    work page 2002

  7. [7]

    Blennerhassett, P. J. & Bassom, A. P. 2006 The linear stability of high-frequency oscillatory flow in a channel . J. Fluid Mech. 556 , 1--25

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    & Vittori, G

    Blondeaux, P. & Vittori, G. 1994 Wall imperfections as a triggering mechanism for Stokes-layer transition . J. Fluid Mech. 264 , 107--135

    work page 1994

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    & Vittori, G

    Blondeaux, P. & Vittori, G. 2021 Revisiting the momentary stability analysis of the Stokes boundary layer . J. Fluid Mech. 919 , A36

    2021

  2. [10]

    Cowley, S. J. 1987 High frequency Rayleigh instability of Stokes layers . In Stability of Time Dependent and Spatially Varying Flows\/ (ed. D. L. Dwoyer & M. Y. Hussaini ) , p. 261 . Springer-Verlag, New York

    1987

  3. [11]

    Davis, S. H. 1976 The stability of time-periodic flows . Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 8 , 57--74

    1976

  4. [12]

    , White, C

    Ebadi, A. , White, C. M. , Pond, I. & Dubief, Y. 2019 Mean dynamics and transition to turbulence in oscillatory channel flow . J. Fluid Mech. 880 , 864--889

    2019

  5. [13]

    & Peyret, R

    Ehrenstein, U. & Peyret, R. 1989 A Chebyshev collocation method for the Navier--Stokes equations with application to double-diffusive convection . Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 9 (4), 427--452

    1989

  6. [14]

    Farrell, B. F. & Ioannou, P. J. 1996 Generalized Stability Theory. Part II: Nonautonomous Operators . J. Atmos. Sci. 53 (14), 2041 -- 2053

    1996

  7. [15]

    1978 The linear stability of flat Stokes layers

    Hall, P. 1978 The linear stability of flat Stokes layers . Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 359 (1697), 151--166

    1978

  8. [16]

    2015 Lagrangian coherent structures

    Haller, G. 2015 Lagrangian coherent structures . Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 47 , 137--162

    2015

  9. [17]

    , Kashiwayanagi, M

    Hino, M. , Kashiwayanagi, M. , Nakayama, A. & Hara, T. 1983 Experiments on the turbulence statistics and the structure of a reciprocating oscillatory flow . J. Fluid Mech. 131 , 363--400

    1983

  10. [18]

    , Sawamoto, M

    Hino, M. , Sawamoto, M. & Takasu, S. 1976 Experiments on transition to turbulence in an oscillatory pipe flow . J. Fluid Mech. 75 (2), 193--207

    1976

  11. [19]

    Jensen, B. L. , Sumer, B. M. & Freds e, J. 1989 Turbulent oscillatory boundary layers at high Reynolds numbers . J. Fluid Mech. 206 , 265--297

    1989

  12. [20]

    2013 How linear is wall-bounded turbulence? Phys

    Jim \'e nez, J. 2013 How linear is wall-bounded turbulence? Phys. Fluids 25 (11), 110814

    2013

  13. [21]

    & Davis, S

    von Kerczek, C. & Davis, S. H. 1974 Linear stability theory of oscillatory Stokes layers . J. Fluid Mech. 62 (4), 753--773

    1974

  14. [22]

    Kern, J. S. , Beneitez, M. , Hanifi, A. & Henningson, D. S. 2021 Transient linear stability of pulsating Poiseuille flow using optimally time-dependent modes . J. Fluid Mech. 927 , A6

    2021

  15. [23]

    , Moin, P

    Kim, J. , Moin, P. & Moser, R. 1987 Turbulence statistics in fully developed channel flow at low Reynolds number . J. Fluid Mech. 177 , 133--166

    1987

  16. [24]

    , Lundbladh, A

    Komminaho, J. , Lundbladh, A. & Johansson, A. V. 1996 Very large structures in plane turbulent Couette flow . J. Fluid Mech. 320 , 259--285

    1996

  17. [25]

    Lee, M. J. & Kim, J. . 1991 The structure of turbulence in a simulated plane Couette flow . In In Eighth Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows\/ , pp. 5.3.1--5.3.6. Technical University of Munich

    1991

  18. [26]

    , Shadden, S

    Lekien, F. , Shadden, S. C. & Marsden, J. E. 2007 Lagrangian coherent structures in n-dimensional systems . J. Math. Phys. 48 (6), 065404

    2007

  19. [27]

    , Constantinou, N

    Lozano-Dur \'a n, A. , Constantinou, N. C. , Nikolaidis, M.-A. & Karp, M. 2021 Cause-and-effect of linear mechanisms sustaining wall turbulence . J. Fluid Mech. 914 , A8

    2021

  20. [28]

    & Bottaro, A

    Luchini, P. & Bottaro, A. 2014 Adjoint equations in stability analysis . Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 46 (1), 493--517

    2014

  21. [29]

    Luo, J. & Wu, X. 2010 On the linear instability of a finite Stokes layer: Instantaneous versus Floquet modes . Phys. Fluids 22 (5), 054106

    2010

  22. [30]

    Madabhushi, R. K. , Balachandar, S. & Vanka, S.P. 1993 A divergence-free chebyshev collocation procedure for incompressible flows with two non-periodic directions . J. Comput. Phys. 105 (2), 199--206

    1993

  23. [31]

    , Vacca, A

    Manna, M. , Vacca, A. & Verzicco, R. 2015 Pulsating pipe flow with large-amplitude oscillations in the very high frequency regime. Part 2. Phase-averaged analysis . J. Fluid Mech. 766 , 272--296

    2015

  24. [32]

    & Thomann, H

    Merkli, P. & Thomann, H. 1975 Transition to turbulence in oscillating pipe flow . J. Fluid Mech. 68 (3), 567--576

    1975

  25. [33]

    Mitran, S. M. , Forest, M. G. , Yao, L. , Lindley, B. & Hill, D. B. 2008 Extensions of the Ferry shear wave model for active linear and nonlinear microrheology . J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 154 (2), 120--135

    2008

  26. [34]

    Monkewitz, P. A. & Bunster, A. 1985 The Stability of the Stokes Layer: Visual Observations and Some Theoretical Considerations . In Stability o f Time Dependent and Spatially Varying Flows\/ (ed. D. L. Dwoyer & M. Y. Hussaini ) . Springer-Verlag New York

    1985

  27. [35]

    Moser, R. D. , Kim, J. & Mansour, N. N. 1999 Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow up to Re_ =590 . Phys. Fluids 11 (4), 943--945

    1999

  28. [36]

    & Schmid, P

    Pier, B. & Schmid, P. J. 2021 Optimal energy growth in pulsatile channel and pipe flows . J. Fluid Mech. 926 , A11

    2021

  29. [37]

    , Bernardini, M

    Pirozzoli, S. , Bernardini, M. & Orlandi, P. 2014 Turbulence statistics in Couette flow at high Reynolds number . J. Fluid Mech. 758 , 327--343

    2014

  30. [38]

    Schmid, P. J. & Henningson, D. S. 2001 Stability and Transition in Shear Flows \/ . Applied Mathematical Sciences\/ . Springer Verlag, New York

    2001

  31. [39]

    Shadden, S. C. 2012 Lagrangian coherent structures . In Transport and Mixing in Laminar Flows: From Microfluidics to Oceanic Currents\/ (ed. R. Grigoriev ) , pp. 59--89. Berlin: Wiley-VCH

    2012

  32. [40]

    , Bassom, A

    Thomas, C. , Bassom, A. P. , Blennerhassett, P. J. & Davies, C. 2010 Direct numerical simulations of small disturbances in the classical Stokes layer . J. Eng. Math. 68 (3), 327--338

    2010

  33. [41]

    , Bassom, A

    Thomas, C. , Bassom, A. P. , Blennerhassett, P. J. & Davies, C. 2011 The linear stability of oscillatory Poiseuille flow in channels and pipes . Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 467 (2133), 2643--2662

    2011

  34. [42]

    , Blennerhassett, P

    Thomas, C. , Blennerhassett, P. J. , Bassom, A. P. & Davies, C. 2015 The linear stability of a Stokes layer subjected to high-frequency perturbations . J. Fluid Mech. 764 , 193--218

    2015

  35. [43]

    , Davies, C

    Thomas, C. , Davies, C. , Bassom, A. P. & Blennerhassett, P. J. 2014 Evolution of disturbance wavepackets in an oscillatory Stokes layer . J. Fluid Mech. 752 , 543--571

    2014

  36. [44]

    & Verzicco, R

    Vittori, G. & Verzicco, R. 1998 Direct simulation of transition in an oscillatory boundary layer . J. Fluid Mech. 371 , 207--232

    1998

  37. [45]

    Weideman, J. A. & Reddy, S. C. 2000 A MATLAB Differentiation Matrix Suite . ACM Trans. on Mathematical Software 26 (4), 465--519

    2000

  38. [46]

    1992 The nonlinear evolution of high-frequency resonant-triad waves in an oscillatory Stokes layer at high Reynolds number

    Wu, X. 1992 The nonlinear evolution of high-frequency resonant-triad waves in an oscillatory Stokes layer at high Reynolds number . J. Fluid Mech. 245 , 553--597

    1992

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.